Spec URL: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/gnome-photos/gnome-photos.spec SRPM URL: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/gnome-photos/repo.f18/SRPMS/gnome-photos-3.7.2-1.fc18.src.rpm Description: Photos, like Documents, Music and Videos, is one of the core GNOME applications meant for find and reminding the user about her content. Fedora Account System Username: bochecha
Let's swap reviews. My review request https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=878653
Since Igor beat me to it, consider this an unofficial review. * rpmlint complains about no-manual-page-for-binary, install-file-in-docs, invalid-desktopfile, incorrect-fsf-address and macro-in-comment. - install-file-in-docs and invalid-desktopfile (Thanks Mathieu) have been fixed upstream * Package is named according to Package Naming Guidelines. * Spec file matches with base package %{name}. * Package meets Packaging Guidelines. * Package meets Licensing Guidelines. * The License field in the spec file matches the actual license. * License text included in %doc. * Spec file is written in American English. * Spec file is legible. * Sources used to build the package matches upstream source. * Package can be successfully built on atleast one primary architecture. * ExcludeArch is not needed. X It should have a BR on gdk-pixbuf2-devel, not gdk-pixbuf2. * Locales are handled properly using %find_lang. * Package does not contain shared library files. X Pedantically speaking it should have Provides: bundled(libgd). See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries - It must be noted that libgd is not meant to be installed as a system wide shared library. It is just a way for GNOME applications to share widgets and other common code on an ad-hoc basis. * Package is not designed to be relocatable. * Package owns all directories created by it. * Files are not listed more than once in %files. * File permissions are set properly. * Macros are used consistently. * Package contains code. * No need for -doc subpackage. X Files marked as %doc do not affect the runtime behaviour. - You could consider marking %{_docdir}/%{name} as %doc * No need for -static subpackage. * No need for -devel subpackage. * Package does not contain libtool archives. * Package has a %{name}.desktop file. - Problems in %{name}.desktop file have been fixed upstream. (Thanks Mathieu) * Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. * Filenames are valid UTF-8. * Package builds in Koji: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=4716019
Sorry, I meant Ivan, not Igor. My apologies.
(In reply to comment #2) > * rpmlint complains about no-manual-page-for-binary, install-file-in-docs, > invalid-desktopfile, incorrect-fsf-address and macro-in-comment. - macro-in-comment is because I commented the line where I validate the desktop file. So when I update to 3.7.3 which has a valid desktop file, I'll uncomment the line and rpmlint's warning will disappear. > - install-file-in-docs and invalid-desktopfile (Thanks Mathieu) have been > fixed upstream Not doing anything for these then, I'll pick them up when updating once you release 3.7.3 :) > X It should have a BR on gdk-pixbuf2-devel, not gdk-pixbuf2. Fixed. > X Pedantically speaking it should have Provides: bundled(libgd). See > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries > - It must be noted that libgd is not meant to be installed as a system > wide shared library. It is just a way for GNOME applications to share > widgets and other common code on an ad-hoc basis. Fixed. > X Files marked as %doc do not affect the runtime behaviour. > - You could consider marking %{_docdir}/%{name} as %doc rpmbuild does that automatically :) $ rpm -qp --docfiles gnome-photos-3.7.2-1.fc18.x86_64.rpm /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/ARTISTS /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/AUTHORS /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/COPYING /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/ChangeLog /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/INSTALL /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/NEWS /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/README
Sorry, I sent my previous comment too early (there seems to be a keyboard shortcut which validates forms in Epiphany :-/ ) (In reply to comment #2) > * rpmlint complains about no-manual-page-for-binary, install-file-in-docs, > invalid-desktopfile, incorrect-fsf-address and macro-in-comment. - macro-in-comment is because I commented the line where I validate the desktop file. So when I update to 3.7.3 which has a valid desktop file, I'll uncomment the line and rpmlint's warning will disappear. - about incorrect-fsf-address, I'll send you a patch which fixes all the addresses, so I'll pick that up in 3.7.3 too. > - install-file-in-docs and invalid-desktopfile (Thanks Mathieu) have been > fixed upstream Not doing anything for these then, I'll pick them up when updating once you release 3.7.3 :) > X It should have a BR on gdk-pixbuf2-devel, not gdk-pixbuf2. Fixed. > X Pedantically speaking it should have Provides: bundled(libgd). See > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries > - It must be noted that libgd is not meant to be installed as a system > wide shared library. It is just a way for GNOME applications to share > widgets and other common code on an ad-hoc basis. Fixed. > X Files marked as %doc do not affect the runtime behaviour. > - You could consider marking %{_docdir}/%{name} as %doc rpmbuild does that automatically :) $ rpm -qp --docfiles gnome-photos-3.7.2-1.fc18.x86_64.rpm /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/ARTISTS /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/AUTHORS /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/COPYING /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/ChangeLog /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/INSTALL /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/NEWS /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/README Spec URL: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/gnome-photos.spec SRPM URL: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/gnome-photos-3.7.2-2.fc18.src.rpm
I couldn't to use this application. When I started it it has no any photos and I couldn't find any way to add them. In .spec you use https://live.gnome.org/Design/Apps/Photos but About of Gnome-Photos used https://live.gnome.org/GnomePhotos. Probably it should be fixed. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Documentation Any relevant documentation included in the source distribution should be included in the package as %doc. Irrelevant documentation include build instructions, the omnipresent INSTALL file containing generic build instructions [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "LGPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 4 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/taurus/877763-gnome- photos/licensecheck.txt Use GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ for License tag Package Review ============== Key: [x] = Pass [!] = Fail [-] = Not applicable [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [-]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install if there is such a file. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "LGPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 4 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/taurus/877763-gnome- photos/licensecheck.txt [x]: The spec file handles locales properly. [x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s) [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: CheckResultdir [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Note: Documentation size is 71680 bytes in 7 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [x]: SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [?]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Rpmlint ------- Checking: gnome-photos-3.7.2-2.fc18.x86_64.rpm gnome-photos-3.7.2-2.fc18.src.rpm gnome-photos-debuginfo-3.7.2-2.fc18.x86_64.rpm gnome-photos.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gnome-photos gnome-photos.x86_64: W: install-file-in-docs /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/INSTALL gnome-photos.x86_64: E: invalid-desktopfile /usr/share/applications/gnome-photos.desktop value "GNOME" for string list key "OnlyShowIn" in group "Desktop Entry" does not have a semicolon (';') as trailing character gnome-photos.src:29: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(libgd) gnome-photos.src:52: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} gnome-photos.src:52: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} gnome-photos.src:52: W: macro-in-comment %{name} gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-image-setup.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-job-queue.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-image-setup.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-image.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-image-private.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-image.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-enums.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-jpg.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-jpg.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-util.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-util.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-png.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-png.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-exif-util.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-preview.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-preview.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-jobs.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-jobs.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-debug.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-debug.c 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 24 errors, 6 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint gnome-photos-debuginfo gnome-photos gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-image-setup.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-job-queue.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-image-setup.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-image.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-image-private.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-image.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-enums.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-jpg.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-jpg.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-util.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-util.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-png.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-png.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-exif-util.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-preview.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-preview.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-jobs.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-jobs.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-debug.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-debug.c gnome-photos.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gnome-photos gnome-photos.x86_64: W: install-file-in-docs /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/INSTALL gnome-photos.x86_64: E: invalid-desktopfile /usr/share/applications/gnome-photos.desktop value "GNOME" for string list key "OnlyShowIn" in group "Desktop Entry" does not have a semicolon (';') as trailing character 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 24 errors, 2 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- gnome-photos-3.7.2-2.fc18.x86_64.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh libX11.so.6()(64bit) libXcomposite.so.1()(64bit) libXdamage.so.1()(64bit) libXext.so.6()(64bit) libXfixes.so.3()(64bit) libXi.so.6()(64bit) libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcairo-gobject.so.2()(64bit) libcairo.so.2()(64bit) libclutter-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libclutter-gtk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libcogl-pango.so.0()(64bit) libcogl.so.11()(64bit) libexempi.so.3()(64bit) libexif.so.12()(64bit) libgdk-3.so.0()(64bit) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgnome-desktop-3.so.4()(64bit) libgoa-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtk-3.so.0()(64bit) libjson-glib-1.0.so.0()(64bit) liblcms2.so.2()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) librsvg-2.so.2()(64bit) librt.so.1()(64bit) libtracker-miner-0.14.so.0()(64bit) libtracker-sparql-0.14.so.0()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) gnome-photos-debuginfo-3.7.2-2.fc18.x86_64.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): Provides -------- gnome-photos-3.7.2-2.fc18.x86_64.rpm: bundled(libgd) gnome-photos = 3.7.2-2.fc18 gnome-photos(x86-64) = 3.7.2-2.fc18 gnome-photos-debuginfo-3.7.2-2.fc18.x86_64.rpm: gnome-photos-debuginfo = 3.7.2-2.fc18 gnome-photos-debuginfo(x86-64) = 3.7.2-2.fc18 MD5-sum check ------------- http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/gnome-photos/3.7/gnome-photos-3.7.2.tar.xz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b1005d7a44c552635aa0dd7a1a2f93e11faab37af036e312e188de3b06446bc4 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b1005d7a44c552635aa0dd7a1a2f93e11faab37af036e312e188de3b06446bc4 Generated by fedora-review 0.3.1 (b71abc1) last change: 2012-10-16 Buildroot used: fedora-18-x86_64 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 877763
(In reply to comment #6) > I couldn't to use this application. When I started it it has no any photos > and I couldn't find any way to add them. You need to have Tracker running and indexing your photos in ~/Pictures. There is no way to « add » pictures to it, it finds them automatically. > In .spec you use https://live.gnome.org/Design/Apps/Photos but About of > Gnome-Photos used https://live.gnome.org/GnomePhotos. > Probably it should be fixed. I didn't know about this URL, so I used the other one. Fixed. > [!]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. > Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: > "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "LGPL (v2 or later)", > "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 4 files have unknown > license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/taurus/877763-gnome- > photos/licensecheck.txt > Use GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ for License tag Good catch! Fixed. > [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. I guess that's a note for Debarshi to add unit tests upstream. :P > [!]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. Doh, I asked you to fix it in NetworkManager-l2tp and I can't do it properly in my own package. :) Fixed. ----- Spec URL: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/gnome-photos.spec SRPM URL: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/gnome-photos-3.7.2-3.fc18.src.rpm
Add explanation for licensies. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios
(In reply to comment #8) > Add explanation for licensies. > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging: > LicensingGuidelines#Multiple_Licensing_Scenarios Fixed. ----- Spec URL: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/gnome-photos.spec SRPM URL: http://bochecha.fedorapeople.org/packages/gnome-photos-3.7.2-4.fc18.src.rpm
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/Guidelines#Documentation Any relevant documentation included in the source distribution should be included in the package as %doc. Irrelevant documentation include build instructions, the omnipresent INSTALL file containing generic build instructions You use %{_docdir}/%{name} instead of %doc
(In reply to comment #10) > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines?rd=Packaging/ > Guidelines#Documentation > Any relevant documentation included in the source distribution should be > included in the package as %doc. Irrelevant documentation include build > instructions, the omnipresent INSTALL file containing generic build > instructions Debarshi (he is the upstream developer) already said in comment 3 that he has fixed this upstream so that the INSTALL file will not get installed any more. So it would be silly to add something in the spec that I'll have to remove when 3.7.3 comes out (which should happen in mid-December). > You use %{_docdir}/%{name} instead of %doc I already answered Debarshi about that in comment 5: files in %{_docdir} are automatically marked as %doc, you don't have to do it manually in the spec.
Ok. IMO no %doc in files confuse me and it's not good to use non-standard way but in really it can't block a review. So you package is approved. Package Review ============== Key: [x] = Pass [!] = Fail [-] = Not applicable [?] = Not evaluated [ ] = Manual review needed ===== MUST items ===== C/C++: [x]: Header files in -devel subpackage, if present. [x]: Package does not contain any libtool archives (.la) [x]: Package does not contain kernel modules. [x]: Package contains no static executables. [x]: Rpath absent or only used for internal libs. Generic: [x]: Package is licensed with an open-source compatible license and meets other legal requirements as defined in the legal section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package successfully compiles and builds into binary rpms on at least one supported primary architecture. [x]: %build honors applicable compiler flags or justifies otherwise. [x]: All build dependencies are listed in BuildRequires, except for any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines. [x]: Package contains no bundled libraries. [x]: Changelog in prescribed format. [x]: Package does not run rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) at the beginning of %install. [x]: Sources contain only permissible code or content. [x]: Each %files section contains %defattr if rpm < 4.4 [x]: Macros in Summary, %description expandable at SRPM build time. [x]: Package contains desktop file if it is a GUI application. [x]: Package installs a %{name}.desktop using desktop-file-install if there is such a file. [-]: Development files must be in a -devel package [x]: Package requires other packages for directories it uses. [x]: Package uses nothing in %doc for runtime. [x]: Package is not known to require ExcludeArch. [x]: Package does not contain duplicates in %files. [x]: Permissions on files are set properly. [x]: Package complies to the Packaging Guidelines [x]: Spec file lacks Packager, Vendor, PreReq tags. [x]: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the license(s) for the package is included in %doc. [x]: License field in the package spec file matches the actual license. Note: Checking patched sources after %prep for licenses. Licenses found: "GPL (v2 or later) (with incorrect FSF address)", "LGPL (v2 or later)", "GPL (v2 or later)", "Unknown or generated". 4 files have unknown license. Detailed output of licensecheck in /home/taurus/877763-gnome- photos/licensecheck.txt [x]: The spec file handles locales properly. [x]: Package consistently uses macro is (instead of hard-coded directory names). [x]: If the package is under multiple licenses, the licensing breakdown must be documented in the spec. [x]: Package is named using only allowed ASCII characters. [x]: Package is named according to the Package Naming Guidelines. [x]: Package does not generate any conflict. Note: Package contains no Conflicts: tag(s) [x]: Package do not use a name that already exist [x]: Package obeys FHS, except libexecdir and /usr/target. [-]: If the package is a rename of another package, proper Obsoletes and Provides are present. [x]: Package must own all directories that it creates. [x]: Package does not own files or directories owned by other packages. [x]: Package installs properly. [x]: Package is not relocatable. [x]: Requires correct, justified where necessary. [x]: CheckResultdir [x]: Rpmlint is run on all rpms the build produces. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Sources used to build the package match the upstream source, as provided in the spec URL. [x]: Spec file is legible and written in American English. [x]: Spec file name must match the spec package %{name}, in the format %{name}.spec. [-]: Package contains systemd file(s) if in need. [x]: File names are valid UTF-8. [x]: Useful -debuginfo package or justification otherwise. [-]: Large documentation must go in a -doc subpackage. Note: Documentation size is 71680 bytes in 7 files. [x]: Packages must not store files under /srv, /opt or /usr/local ===== SHOULD items ===== Generic: [x]: Reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. [x]: Buildroot is not present [x]: Package has no %clean section with rm -rf %{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT) [-]: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it. [x]: Dist tag is present. [x]: No file requires outside of /etc, /bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin. [x]: Final provides and requires are sane (rpm -q --provides and rpm -q --requires). [?]: Package functions as described. [x]: Latest version is packaged. [x]: Package does not include license text files separate from upstream. [x]: The placement of pkgconfig(.pc) files are correct. [x]: Scriptlets must be sane, if used. [x]: SourceX tarball generation or download is documented. [x]: SourceX / PatchY prefixed with %{name}. [x]: SourceX is a working URL. [-]: Description and summary sections in the package spec file contains translations for supported Non-English languages, if available. [x]: Package should compile and build into binary rpms on all supported architectures. [!]: %check is present and all tests pass. [x]: Packages should try to preserve timestamps of original installed files. [x]: Spec use %global instead of %define. ===== EXTRA items ===== Generic: [x]: Rpmlint is run on all installed packages. Note: There are rpmlint messages (see attachment). [x]: Spec file according to URL is the same as in SRPM. [x]: Large data in /usr/share should live in a noarch subpackage if package is arched. Rpmlint ------- Checking: gnome-photos-debuginfo-3.7.2-4.fc18.x86_64.rpm gnome-photos-3.7.2-4.fc18.x86_64.rpm gnome-photos-3.7.2-4.fc18.src.rpm gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-image-setup.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-job-queue.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-image-setup.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-image.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-image-private.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-image.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-enums.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-jpg.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-jpg.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-util.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-util.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-png.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-png.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-exif-util.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-preview.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-preview.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-jobs.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-jobs.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-debug.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-debug.c gnome-photos.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gnome-photos gnome-photos.x86_64: W: install-file-in-docs /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/INSTALL gnome-photos.x86_64: E: invalid-desktopfile /usr/share/applications/gnome-photos.desktop value "GNOME" for string list key "OnlyShowIn" in group "Desktop Entry" does not have a semicolon (';') as trailing character gnome-photos.src:31: W: unversioned-explicit-provides bundled(libgd) gnome-photos.src:54: W: macro-in-comment %{buildroot} gnome-photos.src:54: W: macro-in-comment %{_datadir} gnome-photos.src:54: W: macro-in-comment %{name} 3 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 24 errors, 6 warnings. Rpmlint (installed packages) ---------------------------- # rpmlint gnome-photos gnome-photos-debuginfo gnome-photos.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary gnome-photos gnome-photos.x86_64: W: install-file-in-docs /usr/share/doc/gnome-photos/INSTALL gnome-photos.x86_64: E: invalid-desktopfile /usr/share/applications/gnome-photos.desktop value "GNOME" for string list key "OnlyShowIn" in group "Desktop Entry" does not have a semicolon (';') as trailing character gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-image-setup.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-job-queue.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-image-setup.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-image.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-image-private.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-image.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-enums.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-jpg.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-jpg.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-util.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-util.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-png.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-metadata-reader-png.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-exif-util.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-preview.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-print-preview.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-jobs.c gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-jobs.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-debug.h gnome-photos-debuginfo.x86_64: E: incorrect-fsf-address /usr/src/debug/gnome-photos-3.7.2/src/eog-debug.c 2 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 24 errors, 2 warnings. # echo 'rpmlint-done:' Requires -------- gnome-photos-debuginfo-3.7.2-4.fc18.x86_64.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): gnome-photos-3.7.2-4.fc18.x86_64.rpm (rpmlib, GLIBC filtered): /bin/sh libX11.so.6()(64bit) libXcomposite.so.1()(64bit) libXdamage.so.1()(64bit) libXext.so.6()(64bit) libXfixes.so.3()(64bit) libXi.so.6()(64bit) libatk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libcairo-gobject.so.2()(64bit) libcairo.so.2()(64bit) libclutter-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libclutter-gtk-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libcogl-pango.so.0()(64bit) libcogl.so.11()(64bit) libexempi.so.3()(64bit) libexif.so.12()(64bit) libgdk-3.so.0()(64bit) libgdk_pixbuf-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgio-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libglib-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgmodule-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgnome-desktop-3.so.4()(64bit) libgoa-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libgobject-2.0.so.0()(64bit) libgtk-3.so.0()(64bit) libjson-glib-1.0.so.0()(64bit) liblcms2.so.2()(64bit) libm.so.6()(64bit) libpango-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpangocairo-1.0.so.0()(64bit) libpthread.so.0()(64bit) librsvg-2.so.2()(64bit) librt.so.1()(64bit) libtracker-miner-0.14.so.0()(64bit) libtracker-sparql-0.14.so.0()(64bit) libz.so.1()(64bit) rtld(GNU_HASH) Provides -------- gnome-photos-debuginfo-3.7.2-4.fc18.x86_64.rpm: gnome-photos-debuginfo = 3.7.2-4.fc18 gnome-photos-debuginfo(x86-64) = 3.7.2-4.fc18 gnome-photos-3.7.2-4.fc18.x86_64.rpm: bundled(libgd) gnome-photos = 3.7.2-4.fc18 gnome-photos(x86-64) = 3.7.2-4.fc18 MD5-sum check ------------- http://ftp.gnome.org/pub/GNOME/sources/gnome-photos/3.7/gnome-photos-3.7.2.tar.xz : CHECKSUM(SHA256) this package : b1005d7a44c552635aa0dd7a1a2f93e11faab37af036e312e188de3b06446bc4 CHECKSUM(SHA256) upstream package : b1005d7a44c552635aa0dd7a1a2f93e11faab37af036e312e188de3b06446bc4 Generated by fedora-review 0.3.1 (b71abc1) last change: 2012-10-16 Buildroot used: fedora-18-x86_64 Command line :/usr/bin/fedora-review -b 877763
New Package SCM Request ======================= Package Name: gnome-photos Short Description: Access, organize and share your photos on GNOME Owners: bochecha Branches: devel InitialCC:
gnome-photos has been built